The story arc
of every papal trip is the same. First, journalists try to invent a controversy
that they find more interesting than the true purpose of the trip. Then, the
Pope wins people over in ways no one expected. Finally, surprised journalists
file stories about how the Pope isn’t such a bad guy after all.

In the story of Pope Benedict XVI’s
trip to Africa — a trip that is ongoing as we go to press — that story is
playing itself out. This time, the controversy is over the Holy Father’s
remarks about condoms and AIDS.

Pope Benedict addressed the AIDS
crisis with reporters on the plane to Cameroon. “You can’t resolve it with the
distribution of condoms,” he said. “On the contrary, it increases the problem.”

Then, of course, shocked and
outraged headlines raised the alarm about the Holy Father’s words.

But the Pope’s logic should be
clear. We can think of a dozen analogies that make it clear.

Or, better, you can make your own
analogy. To do so, first consider the facts of the matter.

Fact one: AIDS is
deadly.

Fact two: It is
spread by extramarital sex, which happens in moments of excitement, not moments
of calculating self-control.

Fact three:
Government officials in America and abroad have decided that saying, “Don’t
have extramarital sex” is not an option.

2. Pick a method of spreading it
that happens in moments of excitement (playing with guns, experimenting with
fire, the deadly “choking game” adolescents were playing that the media
recently warned about).

3. Apply the government condom
response to the question.

To see just how absurd this is,
rewrite actual headlines about the Pope’s condom comments with your new facts:

“Vatican defends Pope’s stand
against playing with guns, but criticism mounts.” The body of the story would
quote experts saying, “Bullet-proof vest distribution is the only way to save
lives.”

“Scientists and activists say Church
position against playing with matches is counterproductive.” Instead, fireproof
carpets would be urged.

You might even make this headline:
“German Catholic bishop shows signs of dissent on Church asphyxiation-game
ban.”

The analogies aren’t perfect, of
course. Extramarital sex isn’t only dangerous; it’s immoral. The Church
couldn’t change that if it wanted to. As usual, though, the moral answer
happens to be the one most in conformity with human happiness.

Governments have no problem making
moral calls when it comes to giving advice about such things as playing with
guns or matches or playing asphyxiation games. They say, unequivocally, that
you can’t allow kids to do those things. But when it comes to extramarital sex,
governments (with a few exceptions) refuse to say that it is wrong.

By promoting condoms, they may say
they are just acknowledging that sex will happen and people had better be
prepared. Why do governments try to equip them to do one thing safely, but just
say “No” to the other? Clearly, because they don’t think extramarital sex is
wrong. In fact, they are tacitly supplying a new moral commandment: “Your right
to have sex when and how you want must not be abridged.”

It’s good that we make dangerous
games taboo. If you attach a taboo to a behavior that harms someone, you have
helped them. But if you refuse to attach a taboo to a dangerous (and immoral)
action, you are complicit in the danger (physical and spiritual) you cause.

Those who want to promote condoms to
fight the AIDS epidemic in Africa are killing Africans. The logic shows that.
So does the research.

Our news story before the trip
prepared readers for the AIDS fight. It reminded readers what we first reported
last year: Secular researches say condom promotion worsens AIDS.

Edward Green is director of the AIDS
Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and
Development Studies. His book is Rethinking AIDS Prevention:
Learning From Successes in Developing Countries.

He reports that, between 1989 and
2001, African condom promotion efforts were very successful at distributing
condoms, but were a spectacular failure at tackling the AIDS epidemic. Far more
people than ever used condoms, and far more people than ever got AIDS. The
nations with the highest levels of condom availability were the nations with
the world’s highest HIV rates.

Norman Hearst is a family physician
and epidemiologist at the University of California, San Francisco. UNAIDS, the
Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS, asked Hearst to do a scientific
review to see if condom promotions had reversed HIV/AIDS epidemics.

His review found that not only had
they not helped, they had worsened the problem. Countries with the most condoms
per man tended to have the highest HIV rates.

“Condom promotion in Africa has been
a disaster,” Hearst said. UNAIDS refused to publish Hearst’s findings.

Meanwhile, the Ugandan public
education campaign against AIDS mentioned condoms, but emphasized abstinence,
and sought to return the taboo on extramarital sex. Studies show that from 1991
to 2001 HIV infection rates in Uganda declined from about 15% to 5%.

“The Ugandan model has the most to
teach the rest of the world,” said Green. “This policy should guide the
development of programs in Africa and the Caribbean.”

Jeff Spieler, chief of the research
division in the U.S. Agency for International Development population office,
said, “It just happens to be where the evidence is pointing.”

Catholics shouldn’t feel defensive
about the Church’s teaching. Our moral teaching isn’t the problem in Africa.
It’s the solution — and lives depend on our willingness to proclaim this truth.